snoqueen wrote:The devaluation of human life goes right along with the demented notion one can solve one's personal problems, whatever they are, by killing someone else. Hand in glove.

This is the crux of the problem. Unfortunately, I think the people who commit these acts are beyond the point of solving problems and are bent on being as destructive as possible. For what reason, I'm not sure. Maybe as one last rebellious statement to a world which they perceive to be cruel and f*ed up? This would be a good question to aswer to start looking for a solution to this problem.

This is an emotional event for the whole country. My heart and prayers go out to the victims and families affected by this incidence. While we are all tired of these incidents happening, it is not a time to make emotional decisions regarding constitutional amendments and more gun laws as some have argued.

I am not one to say everybody should be armed (I do not advocate conceal carry or open carry for that matter), and I agree the trend in violence needs to be addressed and stopped. But I think the problem is one of mental health, compassion, and society failing those who need help. While it seems on the surface to be about guns, fundamentally I think we need to address 'crazy'. That is a much more difficult task and is not an easy solution without crossing ethical boundaries. I think the solution comes from being personally good to those around us, reaching out to those in need, and ending the divisiveness sought by ideological extremes. I think the solution also comes from a cultural shift of being a self-centered society focused on greed, to one focused on compassion. Its not a quick fix, but a long term transition. Until this change is made, this type of incident will continue to happen regardless of any new gun laws/restrictions that some are immediately calling for.

Last edited by ouroborus4 on Fri Dec 14, 2012 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Galoot wrote:Ned, I agree it is a constitutional right, although one with many many qualifications. But that doesn't make it an absolute right. Read what Sno just said, and see if you can find it in your Grinch of a heart to actually be a human being for a change.

I cried when I read about it--maybe because the school I now teach at is not just a high school, but all grades. And I get to see dozens of wonderful happy little kids walking around the place every day, and the teachers that shepherd them around the place, and the parents who come to pick them up every day. It makes me cry again just thinking about this horrible tragedy.

Damn it, can you NRA types just manage to be human for a day or so? Yeah, this might actually result in some sorts of restrictions on guns. Is that more important than those 26 lives? Really?

Anyone with a heart and children are horrified. But since the politics have already started here, people needed to be reminded that the constitution is not a Chinese menu. It's a document that needs to be taken as a whole, as that's how it was written.

rabble wrote:I find it hard to believe that we have so many more people in this country who devalue human life than there are in all the countries in OJ's post back there, combined.

If we do, then you're right we have a much bigger problem than we thought. But I'm skeptical. I don't think we have that many more psychopaths. I think all these guns we got make it easier for them to act out.

I really don't want to get into a political discussion about this right now, but I will say this: OJ's post showed number of people killed by handguns. US gun laws absolutely make it easier to kill with guns. Ignoring the various other ways people kill each other doesn't reduce the total number of dead though.

Gun's do make it easier to act out a murder or mass murder, but they don't make one decided to seek that goal to begin with.

Ned Flanders wrote:people needed to be reminded that the constitution is not a Chinese menu. It's a document that needs to be taken as a whole, as that's how it was written.

Then we also have to remember that unlike a Chinese menu, it is possible to change the contents of the Constitution if it fails to suit our needs.

The Constitution was written as a complete document, Ned? That is a complete lie. Why do you think the Bill of Rights constitute 10 "amendments"? Do you think they were actually PART of the original document? My goodness.

A permissive gun regime is not the only reason that the United States suffers so many atrocities like the one in Connecticut. An inadequate mental health system is surely at least as important a part of the answer, as are half a dozen other factors arising from some of the deepest wellsprings of American culture.

Nor can anybody promise that more rational gun laws would prevent each and every mass murder in this country. Gun killings do occur even in countries that restrict guns with maximum severity.

But we can say that if the United States worked harder to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be many, many fewer atrocities like the one in Connecticut.

And I'll say: I'll accept no lectures about "sensitivity" on days of tragedy like today from people who work the other 364 days of the year against any attempt to prevent such tragedies.

It's bad enough to have a gun lobby. It's the last straw when that lobby also sets up itself as the civility police. It may not be politically possible to do anything about the prevalence of weapons of mass murder. But it damn well ought to be possible to complain about them - and about the people who condone them.

Francis Di Domizio wrote:I really don't want to get into a political discussion about this right now, but I will say this: OJ's post showed number of people killed by handguns. US gun laws absolutely make it easier to kill with guns. Ignoring the various other ways people kill each other doesn't reduce the total number of dead though.

Okay. So, you think it's possible that some or all of those countries had over ten thousand killings (or whatever adjusted population percentage it would be) in which the murder weapon or accident implement was not a gun? You are treating this as a reasonable possibility?

Galoot wrote:The Constitution was written as a complete document, Ned? That is a complete lie. Why do you think the Bill of Rights constitute 10 "amendments"? Do you think they were actually PART of the original document? My goodness.

Galoot wrote:what specific measures would you propose to prevent such an occurrence as the CT massacre? Of course, it isn't up to you, but at least we on the left have a proposal for action.

ouroborus4 wrote:I think the solution comes from being personally good to those around us, reaching out to those in need, and ending the divisiveness sought by ideological extremes. I think the solution also comes from a cultural shift of being a self-centered society focused on greed, to one focused on compassion. Its not a quick fix, but a long term transition. Until this change is made, this type of incident will continue to happen regardless of any new gun laws/restrictions that some are immediately calling for.

I would further advocate looking at what causes a person to do this (not what tools they used to do it). Once that is found, a path for a series of solutions could be implemented. Identifiying what ideological basis they were working from, what life experiences/abuse led them to this, and why mental health services failed to reach or help them, will lead to possible preventative interventions. Frankly, banning or restricting guns will not address any of these problems.